fungus wrote:I was refering to a comment made by my examiner when I took my IAM test ten years ago, that most ADIs he'd examined drove like learners in as much they didn't make progress where appropriate.

One of the most difficult associates I ever had was an ADI. In town an suburban environments he was fine. The problem was that it was almost impossible to get him to go over 40 in NSL.

+1

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Scary when ADIs are so poor its no wonder the general standard of driving is so abysmal

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Now that explains a lot ... an awful lot!

It's an interesting viewpoint (sic), because the things that are going to get you are, by and large, those closer to you (by definition, really, because if they're not close then they are unlikely to be in collision with you). So if someone drives in such a manner that they can stop if necessary, then shouldn't that be applauded? It's all well and having great observation skills and seeing a hazard approaching from space , but that's a 'nice' rather than a 'necessary'.

Perhaps, rather than criticising ADIs for doing what they do, this opens up a wider question of what should they do? They will only do what the test requires.

FWIW, when Foal was learning, an ADI did the basics and test stuff and I (with Chris Gilbert co-driving via DVD) did the higher-level and some finesse stuff

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Now that explains a lot ... an awful lot!

It's an interesting viewpoint (sic), because the things that are going to get you are, by and large, those closer to you (by definition, really, because if they're not close then they are unlikely to be in collision with you). So if someone drives in such a manner that they can stop if necessary, then shouldn't that be applauded? It's all well and having great observation skills and seeing a hazard approaching from space , but that's a 'nice' rather than a 'necessary'.

Plus, he said that there was no point whatsoever in developing observation. All he needed to look at was the distance he could stop in at his speed. so travelling at 30mph, he only needed to know what was happening 75 feet away.

Now that explains a lot ... an awful lot!

It's an interesting viewpoint (sic), because the things that are going to get you are, by and large, those closer to you (by definition, really, because if they're not close then they are unlikely to be in collision with you). So if someone drives in such a manner that they can stop if necessary, then shouldn't that be applauded? It's all well and having great observation skills and seeing a hazard approaching from space , but that's a 'nice' rather than a 'necessary'.

Looking only at the immediate foreground leads to a drive that totally reactive rather than predictive. There will be no awareness of developing hazards in the middle distance or the tell-tale sea of brake lights in the far distance. It is a completely short-sighted (no pun intended) way to drive and, IMO, absolutely NOT what should be taught to leaners.

Good practice is far easier to instil while the clay is still malleable and before all the bad habits become ingrained.

ETA: In Superdriver, Sir John Whitmore advocates scanning as far ahead as possible and trusting your peripheral vision to take care of the stuff closer to the car. And anyway, your vision will naturally vary with speed. When you slow down you will look closer to the car. When you speed up you will tend to look further away. It is the same difference when walking or running.

Strangely Brown wrote:Looking only at the immediate foreground leads to a drive that totally reactive rather than predictive. There will be no awareness of developing hazards in the middle distance or the tell-tale sea of brake lights in the far distance. It is a completely short-sighted (no pun intended) way to drive and, IMO, absolutely NOT what should be taught to leaners.

Good practice is far easier to instil while the clay is still malleable and before all the bad habits become ingrained.

Strangely Brown wrote:Looking only at the immediate foreground leads to a drive that totally reactive rather than predictive. There will be no awareness of developing hazards in the middle distance or the tell-tale sea of brake lights in the far distance. It is a completely short-sighted (no pun intended) way to drive and, IMO, absolutely NOT what should be taught to leaners.

Good practice is far easier to instil while the clay is still malleable and before all the bad habits become ingrained.